Re: Fighters and Hangers

Please accept my apology in advance for my lengthy post.
Our group in St.Louis has worked out a compromise to this.

Background comment; fighters are real cheap in absolute terms; so if
your're playing more than a quick "head-banger" game then fighters can
easily change the balance from a cost basis real quick. Not rocket
science and I believe that the 'List has gone over the benefits of the
relative costs of a couple or even a dozen fighter groups vs almost any
capital ship. Now, our group, being a little unhappy with the standard
FT approach to fighters decided to come up with a variant to the rules
that would at least satisfy (or disatify everyone in our group the
least) the group. 

In dealing with fighters, storage, re-supply, duration, and launching
here's our solution.

First, fighters (at least standard ones) come with 6 combat "actions";
these are used as either combats or can be used as additional boosts for
movement. When our groups fighters have exhausted these 6 then the
fighter can do nothing but move.
If they are engaged by other fighters or encounter other
ships......well, too bad, so sad. Pretty simple. Other more exotic
fighter types are worked out as appropriate.  Single shot fighters, for
example, only have one combat action. Fighters can move as normal
indefinitely.

Second, launch, storage and resupply. Well, we're playing a game that in
space, so we've taken a couple of liberties with this as such. Normally
fighters lauch from the Fighter Bays and we play this way as well with
the following changes and additions.
a) Fighters can be launched two ways; one by the normal means of a Bay
with all of the normal considerations; and two, in the following variant
rule. They can be launched from the surface of the ship if they are
pre-set in position prior to the start combat. Fighters launched in this
way can only move 1 standard movement as per each fighter type; no
actions can be used as additional accellerations or distance. Fighters
that are surface mounted (we use the phrase "mag-locked" to the outer
hull of the carrying ship) can be launched anytime with a notation on
your sheet for that specific turn. Not all fighters need be launched
this fashion. Fighters in Bays can be launched with notation at any
time. Additional rule variant: we've a player who's a real bast**d and
his additional rule suggestion is, well, painfull (but kind of cool). It
is as follows: surface launched fighters fail to release their mag-locks
on a roll of 1 on D6 and spend the turn afixed to their carrier. They
may try up to three more times. After that the fighter is assumed to be
defective and will sit on the hull of the carrier for the remainder of
the battle. 

Additional comment;  The fighter's mass is included when purchasing a
standard fighter bay;  in this variant; you also need to purchase both
additional fighters and the cargo space needed for the mass of the
additional fighters. 

b)R/R/R - Recovery/Re-supply/Relaunch; Fighters can be recovered only at
the rate of 1 fighter group per bay as normal and re-supply and
re-launch are as normal. Unless you are playing with special elite unit
or character rules (this is something we really like) then fighter
groups from the same carrier and of the same type can be consolidated.
Fighters must be recovered and if you are consolidating groups then a
turn per unconsolidated group must pass in order to re-supply before you
re-launch.

c) Damage considerations for surface mounted fighters: fighters
pre-positions for this type of launch are just sitting ducks, if you
will on the surface of the ship. Any attacks upon the ship (excluding
targeted fire such as needle beams) will hit these fighters first.
Our general rule is that these take damage as un-shields beams +1; which
would mean that if a weapon would hit on a 4,5,6 then it would hit on
3,4,5,6 and the fighters would absorb the hits until there were no
longer any fighters then damage would occur as normal. 

Comment: we tried to be balanced in this variant rule. Recognizing that
fighters can be very cheap and that the possibility to serious
un-balance the rules existed, we wanted a bit more flexibility but
didn't want to give away everything to the fighters.
Any comments would be appreciated.

Also, one of our group (who shall remain nameless) in a quick and cheap
fashion, pointed out that according to the above rule if you did not
feel the need to re-supply your fighters then a cargo ship would make an
excellent (and cheap) carrier and we did play a game with his "Yugo Box
Carrier". It was very painfull at the outset but after the fighters had
made their initial runs, it was very bad for him. The Yugo Box concept,
though would be very effective as an auxiliary for commerce raiding.

Thanks
Pat Connaughton
St.Louis,MO

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "K.H.Ranitzsch" <KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: Fighters and Hangers

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "B Lin" <lin@rxkinetix.com>
> > The down side to having the cradle system is that you are limited by
the
> largest size craft that you wish to service.	So if the hangar could
> normally hold 4 large shuttles, you would be limited to only servicing
4
> craft at once, whether shuttles or fighters.	You could choose to mix
sizes,
> with one shuttle sized area and 4-5 fighter sized areas, but then you
will
> be stuck, if you have to try to re-supply 4 shuttles at once.
> 
> Not neccessarily a strict limit. Tools might be arranged so that one
area
> could service 1 large, 2 mid-sized or three small craft.
> 
> And, by the way, I see no need for sensor arms to check a craft's
position
> and Id. Present technology can do that using fixed cameras, induction
loops,
> microwave sensors etc.
> Any positioning of the craft can also be done automatically by the
craft
> itself. Modern carrier vehicles for cargo containers can move and
stack 20'
> and 40' foot containers fully automatically, with nobody nearby. You
just
> tell them 'Put Container 123 in position ABC' 'Pick up 890 from XYZ
and move
> it to QWE'.
> 
> 
> Greetings
> Karl Heinz
> 
>